EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!

EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!
CLICK - GOAL - 100,000 NEW SIGNATURES! 75,000 SIGNATURES HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED TO GOVERNOR CUOMO!

EFF Urges Court to Block Dragnet Subpoenas Targeting Online Commenters

EFF Urges Court to Block Dragnet Subpoenas Targeting Online Commenters
CLICK! For the full motion to quash: http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/hersh_v_cohen/UOJ-motiontoquashmemo.pdf

Thursday, December 19, 2013

Helbrans had founded a yeshiva in Monsey, New York, after serving a two-year prison term in the US for a 1994 kidnapping




Child abuse allegations are lies, ‘Taliban-style’ Hasidic sect insists

In a Times of Israel interview, Nachman Helbrans sets out the philosophy of his extremist ultra-Orthodox group, which is under investigation in Canada

December 18, 2013, 6:12 pm 3
Lev Tahor children studying in a hotel room in Ontario. (photo credit: YouTube screenshot)

‘I can’t say that a parent has never hit a child on an arm or a leg, if a child got into a dangerous situation like playing with fire. But the accusations of abuse are complete lies,” Nachman Helbrans, son of Lev Tahor’s leader Rabbi Shlomo Helbrans, told The Times of Israel in a telephone interview this week.
 
The Lev Tahor group sprang to global media attention in mid-November when it undertook a mass flight from Quebec to Ontario.

Currently under investigation by Quebec and Ontario child services, the group denies all charges of child abuse and insists the move from Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts, in northern Quebec, to Chatham-Kent, Ontario, close to the US border, is due to differences in educational policies in the two province“We teach through love, not fear. Whereas other Haredi and Hasidic groups make new rulings and focus only on the minutiae of Jewish law, we take time to explain to our children the value of performing every mitzvah (commandment), what a privilege it is, how those who don’t observe commandments are to be pitied, how we are part of being the chosen nation. Of course we are also stricter than other Haredim about the minutiae of Jewish law.”

The founder of the sect, Israeli-born Shlomo Helbrans, was given refugee status in Canada in 2003 after claiming that as an anti-Zionist his life was in danger in Israel. Previously Helbrans had founded a yeshiva in Monsey, New York, after serving a two-year prison term in the US for a 1994 kidnapping. The sect moved to Quebec where the group swelled to some 45 families.
 
The group is accused by its opposition of numerous crimes, including child abuse, child marriage, and removing children from their families as punishment.
 
“The Quebec social services found very minor things, like a single dirty mattress. They did not find any evidence of abuse, none. They found a few minor issues and we are cooperating fully to fix them. The only reason we left was because of education,” Helbrans said.
 
The timing for the hasty flight, days before the child welfare hearing where a Quebec judge ordered the removal of 14 children to foster care, has generated speculation the sect was aware of the impending judgment. The group has since defied the foster care order and a hearing is set for December 23 to decide jurisdiction now that the children are in Ontario.
 
Two additional children, whose identities are protected by the Canadian Child and Welfare Services Act, were removed earlier this week, though quickly reunited with their families under terms that include mental health treatment for the parents, reports the Toronto Star.
 
“In Quebec, the social services can intervene to remove the children when they do not learn the required curriculum. But in Ontario, the social services have no jurisdiction over educational decisions,” said Helbrans. “We won’t teach evolution, which is against the Torah that states that God created the world. We are willing to increase the amount of secular education, and have ordered math books from Toronto to be translated into Yiddish.”
 
The sect is noted for its “Taliban-style” dress for its women and children. Helbrans said all of their religious practices, including their dress in which girls cover their hair and necks from a young age, are based on ancient Jewish tradition.
 
“Up until 250 years ago, Jewish communities dressed similarly around the world, including in Muslim countries,” said Helbrans.
 
In response to allegations of underage marriage, Helbrans said, “No children were married before the age of 16, in a private or public ceremony,” but in individual cases, parents from the group might have gone to Missouri, where marriage can be registered at age 15.
 
Against claims of malnourishment, Helbrans said the group is against genetically modified foods. “We don’t eat chicken or chicken eggs, as they are the result of genetic modification. We don’t consider it kosher, since the chicken’s genes could be mixed up with those of other animals. The rabbis didn’t discuss genetic modification in the Talmud.
 
“The children eat salad, beef, soup, some have beef every day.”
 
Helbrans insists that the case against Lev Tahor is pure anti-Semitism.
 
“The court attacked Jewish religious beliefs. It’s as bad as Communist Russia,” said Helbrans.
 
               

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Tragically, our schools have placed the avoidance of scandal and the "good name" of a teacher over the protection of children.




Gedolim at Work

                                                                                                                             

Sex abuse by teachers: Abusers, abettors deserve public wrath

Print 
Special to The Oregonian By Special to The Oregonian The Oregonian  
By KELLY CLARK and PAUL MONES

The Oregonian series on sexual abuse in the public schools is as important a piece of journalism as the landmark 2002 Boston Globe series on the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church.

Those school districts, administrators, teachers and teacher union representatives --who The Oregonian exposed as turning a blind eye to the pain, suffering and exploitation of children and teens --are every bit deserved of the public's wrath as the bishops and priests who condoned and conspired to cover up the sexual abuse of children by priests.

 The power exercised by the teachers union in protecting its own is what dioceses have historically done with respect to predatory priests.

The response of our schools to sexual abuse sounds eerily familiar: confidential settlements, clandestine financial deals and abusive teachers moving from district to district. The actions of the schools are perhaps more egregious because state law requires that parents send their children to school and imposes on schools the legal obligation to protect the health, safety and welfare of children delivered into their care. That's why the law mandates that teachers and administrators report suspicions of child abuse to appropriate authorities. Tragically, our schools have placed the avoidance of scandal and the good name of a teacher over the protection of children.

Though individual teachers and principals who ignore the complaints and obvious signs of abuse are to blame for this sordid situation, real responsibility also lies with the state Teacher Standards and Practices Commission, which is operating under remarkably naive and myopic rules and regulations.

The commission that hears the complaints of abuse should not be in the business of giving second chances to teachers who admit to sex-related offenses with children. Teachers who engage in any sexually predatory behavior with children should not have contact with children. It is a no-brainer. The research is clear: Except in the most rare and unusual circumstances, adults who are attracted to, or sexually aroused by minors, do not typically change their behavior.

The commission can't even keep up with hearing the complaints. To give it the added responsibility of rehabilitating even so-called "good educators" is foolhardy. As attorneys who have spent our careers protecting children, we abhor the executive director's cavalier pronouncement that the commission makes discipline decisions based upon "gut feelings."

The message from our public educational establishment is clear: When it comes to the matter of sexual abuse, the first priority is not the children but the teachers.

We heartily support The Oregonian's recommendations for reforming this abysmal situation; however there are two efforts that can be undertaken right now. First, there must be stringent enforcement of the mandatory reporting laws, which require teachers and school officials to report suspicions of abuse. There is no doubt that fellow teachers, administrators and school districts that ignore such complaints or agree to silent deals to allow predatory teachers to go quietly away are endangering children. Those who do not report their suspicions of abuse to lawful civilian authorities should be prosecuted. The other method that has proven especially effective for the Catholic Church is civil litigation. If there is one thing cash-strapped school districts can ill-afford, it is paying money damages for grossly negligent and reckless behavior.

-- Kelly Clark is a Portland trial and appellate attorney who has represented plaintiffs in litigation against the Catholic Church, the Mormon Church, the Boy Scouts, public schools, and other "institutions of trust." He is a former Oregon legislator.

-- Paul Mones is an attorney specializing in the children's rights.





Tuesday, December 17, 2013

This Is What Its Come Down To!

PURIM FEVER - THE UOJ ARCHIVES



18 Av 5767 - August 2007..in the goyishe calender..feh... | Mordecai Plut - drektor-

Published Weakly Without Spellcheck

Shame Yisrael Toirah Nutworks

Z'NEWS BULLETIN

Psak Halochoh

ISSUED WITH MESIRAS NEFESH FROM UNDER OUR BEDS IN THE REB MEIER AL Z. HEIMERS MOSHAV ZEKANIM

BS"D, Av 5767

We were appalled and trembling to hear of the terrible breach in our camp in the form of concerts featuring singers and chazanim who sing before men and women in mixed company Rachmono litzlan and even with separate seating, mamash.

Previous gedolei Yisroel totally banned these events - even though there were none, but in their infinite wisdom they knew that there will be many - even where there is separate seating (they can't fool us - we know they sit together in the car). As such we hereby state our combined ignorant and idiot opinion, which is based on irrefutable daas Torah.

A. Attending these performances is totally prohibited, because we say so -- even though we forgot to take our pills for two years at least - could be more - we just don't remember.

B. The prohibition applies to the organizers and the audience, young and old, middle-aged, senile, people in wheelchairs, people who use cains and walkers, the hearing impaired, fagelech, men, women, children, shul candy-men and rebbeim-- regardless of their sexual preferences.


All the more so on the singers and chazanim, who are inducing the masses to sin, mamash - Rachmana litzlan.

C. Newspapers and advertising circulars should not help by advertising these forbidden events, the transgressors call performances. Even the Jewish Press should restrain itself, if at all possible.

D. The singers and chazanim who appear before a mixed audience may not be invited to sing at any wedding or divorce, chap-a-nosh at the smorgasboard, mooch a free meal, take home the flowers, switch to a newer Borsalino at the coat-check room, steal a bencher, or take home a stranger's wife; nor can any event at which they participate be advertised, including tefillos and so-called kosher events, unsupervised fress Pesach events; in order to avoid lending a hand to these transgressors who we consider to be rishaim gemurim, like nothing ever before in klal Yisroel, ever, ever, aver, erva.

May Hashem Yisborach, in His great mercy and kindness, bring them to do teshuvah before Him - and us - by supporting Kupat H'air, and may we merit the eternal Redemption (not the phony Chabad kind), immediately - before the Kolko trial - azuz yimolei sechok peanuts...., vayihee b'yemai Achasvarush....

Signing for the sake of the sanctity, holiness and purity of our people, with trembling hands, spittle dripping out of our mouths, and with soiled diapers....

Yehuda Kolko

Lipa Margulies

Ephraim Shapiro

Shea Fishman

Moshe Eisemann

Matis Weinberg

Shalom Tendler

Mordecai Tendler

Aron Tendler

Sheftel Neuberger

Grepsel Hamburger

Avrohom Mondrowitz

Ephraim Bryks

Aron Twerski

Avi Shafran

Marvin Shick

Avrohom Leizerowitz

Heshy Nussbaum

Shlomo Mandel

Yehuda Nussbaum

Simcha Kaufman

Shmuel Kaminetzky

Yaakov Perlow

Yosef Sholom Eliashiv

Gershon Tannenbaum

Moshe Heinemann

Aharon Yehuda Leib Shteinman

Yaakov Aryeh Alter Chaya

Yissochor Dov Petzel A. Kleiner

Pinchos Nisht-Arein Gegangen

Hertz Frankel

Yitzchak Kaduri

Shmuel Halevi Wosner

Yisroel Hazmana Belsky

Mendel Haganiv Epstein

Moshe Hachazir Finkel

Dovid Ha'truckdriver Cohen

Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz

Moshe Chaim Kurva Ben Gil Arayus

Leibish Flynt

Chaim H. Hefner

Lipa Geldwerth

David(Ben Shmuel)Berkowitz

Lipa Brenner

Baruch Lanner

Chaim Pinchos Sheinberg

Bernard(Berish)Law

C. Yonah Mahoney

Tuvyah Ted Bundy

Tzvi Elimelech Zona

Nissim Karelitz

Dovid Twersky

Shmuel Auerbach

Sholom Klass

Yitzchok Sheiner

Marvin Hier

Israel Singer

Philip Berg

Moshe Sherer

Shabbsai Tzvi

The Rabbis of Baltimore & Ner Israel Rabbinical College agree with above clowns


MEGILLAS SHTUYOT FROM MONSEY CRACKPOTS!


UOJ EXCLUSIVE - THE VIDEO THAT LEIB TROPPER SENT TO THE RABBIS OF MONSEY:

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Not only were there no secular subjects taught, but all secular books were banned and confiscated if found!


The folly of fanatical religious education in Canada (and the U.S.A.)


Fotolia
I have been reading the recent articles about the Lev Tahor and Judaism in a few newspapers, and I can’t help but feel a little neglected by our reporters and politicians here is Ontario. The articles discuss child abuse and lack of a proper education for religious children, but never seem to mention that these problems have been going on for a long time. I am a classic example:

When my parents came from Russia, I was six years old. They met a rabbi who convinced them to send me to his Jewish school, where I learned Jewish and secular subjects. As I went through elementary, I was eventually sent to a school that taught only Jewish subjects, where secular subjects, like math, were optional and only lasted for two hours a day. I remember one year there were three students in the secular program from two classes combined.

For high school I planned to go to a Jewish high school that had many former students attending college and university, something my parents saw as extremely important. The rabbi at our synagogue told us that the Jews running that school weren’t from our sect and that it was a bad school for a Lubavitch boy (that’s the sect we belonged to), so I went to a different type of “Jewish high school”.
There, we studied only Jewish subjects from 7:30 a.m to 9 p.m. for five days a week for five years. We lived in houses that the school owned in the neighbourhood. Not only were there no secular subjects taught, but all secular books were banned and confiscated if found (I’ve always enjoyed reading so I would carefully hide my books). The lack of basic knowledge was so bad I clearly remember one of my 18-year-old classmates asking me how to spell the word “until”. I should also mention that the children whose parents were rabbis or had other religion-related jobs either didn’t pay tuition or paid very little. The families with “real jobs” paid the difference, which exceeded $80,000 for my parents over five years.

The reason my parents kept me at that school was because the administrator and our rabbi told us the school could give my high school credits for my application to post-secondary school. We believed them because we didn’t think a man of God would lie. We asked them every year and every year they said yes. When I graduated I was told that if I wanted to collect my credits, I could call  and ask for the papers. A couple of years later I wanted to try my luck at becoming a police officer, which requires a high school diploma or equivalent. I called  for my credits and was told there were never any government approved credits, just a paper signed by the rabbi. When I asked they’d claimed otherwise, they said, “You never asked for high school credits. You just said ‘credits’ and we call this paper ‘credits.’”

That incident actually kick started my transition out of religion and I am currently working part-time while attending a college culinary program.

The reason I am telling you all this is because we shouldn’t feel like we’re being “invaded” by child-abusing, anti-secular-education fanatics just because the Lev Tahor arrived. These types of fanatics have been here for decades, with few efforts made to halt them. This issue has to be dealt with, especially since many immigrants are being brainwashed into believing the same thing my parents were told, because they’re vulnerable and are just looking for a friend in a new place.

I am hoping that, in my lifetime, I will see the Canadian government start regulating education and making official standards for all children, regardless of race, religion, gender, or background.

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

ATTN: GENIUS RABBIS - AT WHAT AGUDAH CONVENTION WILL YOU ADDRESS ISSUES OF RELEVANCE? NEVER - YOU ARE CLUELESS!




           
    
    

      

My Wig Was Beautiful and Expensive, and Everybody Loved It—Except Me

 

When I got married, my sheitel was a symbol of my vows and my Orthodoxy. Then it became a symbol of my discontent.


PrintEmail


Related Content

Searching for the Perfect Wig

Other Orthodox women cover their hair with beautiful sheitels. Why does mine make me look like Marge Simpson?

My Fashion Choices—and My Husband’s—Reveal the Risks of Looking Hasidic

How people treat us in public often depends on what we’re wearing on our heads, whether it’s my wig or his yarmulke

Pants, Pants Revolution: How My First Pair of Jeans Redefined Modesty for Me

When I bought my first pair of jeans recently, I redefined what modesty means to me as an Orthodox woman
         
The first time I went outside as a married woman without my hair covered was by accident.

I had just had a big fight with my new husband, and in a huff I stormed out of our apartment to the bewilderingly quiet street in the Westchester hamlet where we were living. I was halfway up the block before I realized that I had forgotten to put something on my head, and I paused as I debated whether I should go back for a hat. But I thought better of it: Lightning had not struck; I had not burst into flames for my transgression. In the grand scheme of things—my growing uncertainty about my religious observance, my misery in my isolation in Westchester County—making sure my hair was covered had suddenly become a concern that barely registered for me. I kept walking.


It was after that incident that I had to admit, after months of discomfort and growing antipathy to religiosity, that I truly didn’t believe it was an external accessory like a wig, or skirts instead of pants, that made someone a good Jew. Being a good person made someone a good Jew. Finding meaningful ways to live in the spirit of the central virtues of Judaism made someone a good Jew, and I genuinely believed that there are many different ways to put those virtues, of which modesty is one, into practice. Wearing a wig might work for another woman to embody that value, but, I finally realized, it wasn’t working for me.
***
I started covering my hair when I got married five years years ago, at age 22. Despite growing up Orthodox in Flatbush, Brooklyn, and spending eight years at a strict, Bais Yaakov-like yeshiva, I was resistant to the idea of donning a wig or other head covering after my wedding, as my mother had done with enthusiasm decades earlier. I felt restricted enough by Orthodox rules already without adding to the dogma. But covering my hair seemed really important to other people, including my parents—and my fiancé, a ba’al teshuva. Rather than risk disappointing them over what ultimately seemed like a superficial issue, I chose to just go along with it. It was easier not to think of any deeper meaning behind my doubts.

In a dank, Flatbush basement operation run by a busy and irreverently funny sheitel macher—think the snarky best friend from every romantic comedy of the last decade—I tried on wigs of varying shades and lengths, my mother in the corner beaming with pride and just itching to open her wallet. The final product was a custom-made, $1,200 masterpiece of long silky layers dyed a deep, rich chocolate color. As I stared at myself in the mirror, enamored by my sudden sophistication, I thought, “This isn’t so bad. I could totally do this.” It was an undeniably sexy wig, and it cried out for a sexy moniker.

I called her Esmeralda.

But no matter how expensive and beautiful Esmeralda was, I quickly found her wanting. Wearing a wig for longer than 10 minutes was uncomfortable. I constantly felt like it was incorrectly tethered to my scalp, which unnerved me and had me anxiously adjusting the combs every five minutes for fear that she had surreptitiously slipped halfway off my head. Esmeralda and I simply didn’t take to each other, and a few weeks later, I switched to fabric mitpachot and bandanas, only bringing her out for Shabbos and special occasions.

I soon grew to despise those other head coverings as well. I had always liked my own thick, straight hair that inspired envy in friends with frizzier mops, who’d run for cover at the first sign of rain or humidity while I moseyed along, knowing my own hair would stay unaffected. Now I resented covering it up each day. The bandanas made me feel frumpy, and it was annoying having to find something that vaguely matched my outfit each day.

I know, I know: first-world problems. But being miffed by the mundane often cloaks an antagonism that is more deep-rooted and is frequently the stuff on which our lives turn in both trivial and more significant ways. And as I continued wearily rifling through my growing collection of hair coverings each day, I grew to begrudge what I had been taught about the deeper reasoning behind the rule. Talmudically, hair is defined as ervah, or “sexually erotic,” but this seems almost laughably out-of-date and removed from modern norms, where pop stars regularly writhe around on stage in their underwear. I sincerely doubted that my hair, lovely as it is, would drive any man wild to the point of intoxication. Also, I had learned, wearing a wig would modestly communicate to other men that I was not available. This had chafed my feminist tendencies when I learned about it (why was it my job to advertise anything to these men?) but much more so when I was actually practicing it. Besides, couldn’t my married state be easily inferred from my wedding ring?

There were other reasons for my discontent. I had grown jaded watching the hordes of women in Flatbush in skin-tight skirts and $500 stilettos who told me they were capturing the essence of modesty as God prescribed it, because they also wore sheitels. I was weary of the Jews obsessed with one-upping their neighbors with chumras (prohibitions) like forbidding “treif” stuffed animals in their home or shunning sushi for its popularity in secular culture. Are those Jews really trying to live a meaningful Jewish life, I wondered, or are they just caught in a byzantine web of misguided chumras and loopholes that distort the original intent and meaning behind the laws?

I had looked forward to living in a largely non-Jewish town in Westchester, away from prying eyes and the keeping-up-with-the-Goldbergs rat race that existed in Brooklyn. I discovered, though, that despite the relaxed atmosphere at the small Chabad that I attended—it was the only Orthodox shul nearby, although ironically, it served mostly unaffiliated and non-observant Jews—my discomfort remained. I was one of only three observant women and the only one “frum from birth” aside from the rabbi’s wife, and this instantly made me a spectacle. Though they had no malicious intent, people stared at me when I wore the wig—so much for modesty—and when I prayed, standing and bowing by rote at the appropriate points in prayer. “Look,” they whispered, nudging their friends, “she really knows what she’s doing.”

Esmeralda served to make me a paragon of Orthodoxy to these less-observant people, and it was a status I had neither expected nor asked for. If my skirt rested even slightly above my knees, they would adopt mock outrage as they tsk-tsked and waved a finger at me. I was repeatedly approached to ask if I knew where to buy kosher food, or how to affix a mezuzah, or if their son-in-law’s Reform conversion meant he wasn’t really Jewish, after all. What I thought was my escape from preconceived expectations and whispering yentas turned out to be life under a different microscope, and it was just as suffocating....



1 2 View as single page
 


Thursday, December 05, 2013

"We'll physically give him beatings," Belsky said in Yiddish, according to Amsel.


The beth din was held at the Yeshiva Torah Vodaas in Ditmas Park. Among the several men present, according to Amsel, were Rabbi Israel Belsky, who taught a class at the yeshiva;Rabbi Martin Wolmark, a respected educator from upstate; and Mendel Epstein.
Belsky told Amsel that Rubin had already missed a hearing in December. Because Rubin again failed to show up, Amsel recalled Belsky saying, he'd be tried in absentia and the judges would authorize the use of force to secure a get. "We'll physically give him beatings," Belsky said in Yiddish, according to Amsel.
The October 1996 assault left Rubin bruised and bloodied. A passing motorist saw him and took him to the police station, where officers removed his handcuffs and transported him to a hospital. As he recuperated, Rubin set out to compile evidence against the men he suspected were behind the attack.
He had an associate make phone calls to some of the men involved, posing as a rabbi claiming that Rubin had contacted him to try to have the get reversed. The caller made it clear that he had no qualms with the kidnapping, and that he was simply hoping to confirm that the get was valid. Rubin's friend Barry Markowitz later filed an affidavit stating that he set up a voice-recording system and listened in on the calls.
On November 16 and December 10, 1996, a "Rabbi Wieder" made calls to Belsky. In a transcript of the conversations, translated from Yiddish to English and later filed in court, Belsky describes what he knew about Rubin: "We heard this person is such a rotten animal that there is no equal on this earth." Belsky goes on to explain that he and other rabbis held a tribunal and "the verdict was that there should be compulsion." He stresses that he was not present at the beating but says, "I was in agreement, after many weeks and weeks of consideration and discussing the compulsion itself."
"If he deserves the beatings, then he deserves it," the man masquerading as Wieder responds. "You felt that he deserves it, then good."
"Yes, it's very hard on my heart," Belsky replies. "I don't keep a record, but it was the first time which I have agreed to such a thing." (Belsky, who denied in court having participated in the attack, did not respond to interview requests from the Voice. Neither did his lawyer,Robert Rimberg.)

Bad Rabbi: Tales of Extortion and Torture Depict a Divorce Broker's Brutal Grip on the Orthodox Community

Bad Rabbi: Tales of Extortion and Torture Depict a Divorce Broker's Brutal Grip on the Orthodox Community
Brian Stauffer
This much Abraham Rubin knew: He was lying, blindfolded and handcuffed, in the back of a van. He could feel it winding through the streets. He figured at least three men were in there with him, plus the driver. There was the one who'd stepped out of nowhere and punched him in the face as he walked down 56th Street in Brooklyn's Borough Park neighborhood just a few minutes earlier. And two, maybe three others who'd bull-rushed him and threw him into the van.

"He says he is the undertaker of failed marriages," says Gordon. "The relationship dies; someone has to bury it."
"We only want you to be a Jew," one of them said in Yiddish.
The van stopped. Rubin heard a door open and the men getting out. "The rabbi is coming," one said. Then the sound of two or more men climbing in beside him.

One asked Rubin in English to repeat what he was about to say.

"On the fourth day of the week, the 10th day of the month of Heshvan in the year 5757 in the creation of the world . . ."

It was the beginning of an oath, and the 31-year-old Rubin, a rabbi himself, knew the words that would follow.

He told the man that he would not repeat them.

That's when the punching began. A relentless onslaught of fists, pummeling his torso and face. Then came the stun gun, jolting Rubin's entire body, over and over. Rubin felt the men pull down his pants, felt the device applied to his genitals. Again and again.

Eventually, the words flowed from him.

". . . willingly consent, being under no duress, to release, discharge, and divorce you to be on your own, you, my wife . . .
". . . so that you are permitted and have authority over yourself to go and marry any man you desire . . .
". . . This shall be for you from me a bill of dismissal, a letter of release, and a document of absolution, in accordance with the law of Moses and Israel."

Three hours after snatching him off the street, at around 10 o'clock on the night of October 23, 1996, his abductors left Rubin, still blindfolded and handcuffed, at the entrance to a cemetery.

Six days a week, 13th Avenue, Borough Park's central commercial thoroughfare, bustles. The sidewalks are crammed, a steady stream of patrons flowing in and out of the many shops. The storefronts, bearing signs written in Hebrew script, are diverse — from shoes to books to fruits and vegetables. Pedestrian attire, on the other hand, is unvarying. The men wear long black coats and wide-brimmed black felt hats. Many carry a book tucked under an arm. The women, who favor long black skirts and running shoes, push strollers.

On Saturdays, 13th Avenue feels like an empty movie set. Even the Duane Reade is closed. Residents of Borough Park honor the Sabbath. According to a 2011 study by the United Jewish Appeal–Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York, more than three-fourths of the neighborhood's population of 170,000 is Jewish. The district's city councilman, David Greenfield, has called Borough Park "the Jewish capital of the United States."

The first local synagogue opened its doors in 1904, about the time Jewish immigrants began building a community in the neighborhood. Waves of new families from Europe arrived following each World War. Through the second half of the 20th century, as Americans of all faiths uprooted for the suburbs, Borough Park's population turned increasingly Orthodox, a trend fueled by an influx of immigrants who practiced the ultra-conservative Haredi strain of Judaism. The UJA–Federation study reported that 80 percent of Borough Park Jews classified themselves as Orthodox. Only 2 percent classified themselves as Reform, the religion's most popular liberal denomination in the U.S. Among the respondents, 94 percent answered that their "closest friends are mostly Jewish."

In Borough Park, faith is deeply embedded into day-to-day life. Present in buildings: Affixed to the right side of nearly every doorframe is a mezuzah. Present in travel: Inside the B110 bus, which offers special express service between Borough Park and Williamsburg but doesn't accept MetroCards, a sign reads, "When boarding a crowded bus with standing passengers in the front, women should board the back door after paying the driver in the front." Present in disagreements: Community members rarely take their legal disputes to civil court, choosing instead to settle them through a Jewish rabbinical court, a beth din. An insular legal system governed by Jewish law, the beth din perhaps best embodies the community's self-sufficiency.

For the court's proceedings, litigants typically hire an advocate, known as a to'ein, to argue the case.
In Borough Park, few to'anim were as prominent as Mendel Epstein.

Epstein, now 68, was known to many in the Orthodox Jewish community as a devoted feminist. Stout and bald, with a bushy beard and a steely demeanor, he specialized in divorces. Over three decades he built a reputation for effectively representing women. Says one local rabbi, "He presented himself as a champion for the underdog."

The women who came to Epstein often had a singular problem: Their husbands refused to grant them a get, a document without which an Orthodox Jewish marriage cannot be dissolved. The rule can be traced to the biblical Book of Deuteronomy, and its sway remains stifling: Without a get, a woman who remarries is considered adulterous. Any children fathered by her new husband are illegitimate under Orthodox law and prohibited from marrying within the faith.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7